Conceptualising a Child-Centric Paradigm

Adams, Damian

doi:10.1007/s11673-013-9454-7

Cited by 11 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In several of these extracts authors problematised moral principles or rules as well as the implementation of those rules and both categories of problematising were not clearly distinguishable. According to Adams (2013), for example, evidence from studies of adult offspring's perceptions that showed that some offspring 'are distressed by procreative choices that their parents were able to make' (Adams 2013, p. 377) provided support for a 'frame-shift' of reproductive freedom: limiting this freedom in agreement with considerations regarding the welfare of the child. The empirical claim, for which several studies were referred to, was that 'the majority of offspring believe that they should know the identity of their donors' (Adams 2013, p. 373).…”

Section: Evidence Used To Problematise a Normative Claimmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secondary use of empirical research data in medical ethics papers on gamete donation: forms of use and pitfalls

Provoost

2015

Monash Bioeth. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to provide a description of how authors publishing in medical ethics journals have made use of empirical research data in papers on the topic of gamete or embryo donation by means of references to studies conducted by others (secondary use). Rather than making a direct contribution to the theoretical methodological literature about the role empirical research data could play or should play in ethics studies, the focus is on the particular uses of these data and the problems that can be encountered with this use. In the selection of papers examined, apart from being used to describe the context, empirical evidence was mainly used to recount problems that needed solving. Few of the authors looked critically at the quality of the studies they quoted, and several instances were found of empirical data being used poorly or inappropriately. This study provides some initial baseline evidence that shows empirical data, in the form of references to studies, are sometimes being used in inappropriate ways. This suggests that medical ethicists should be more concerned about the quality of the empirical data selected, the appropriateness of the choice for a particular type of data (from a particular type of study) and the correct integration of this evidence in sound argumentation. Given that empirical data can be misused also when merely cited instead of reported, it may be worthwhile to explore good practice requirements for this type of use of empirical data in medical ethics.

show abstract

Section: Evidence Used To Problematise a Normative Claimmentioning

confidence: 99%